Cyanogen Mod Raises $23 Million Funding All Set To Become Major Android Player

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Cyanogen Mod Raises $23 Million Funding All Set To Become Major Android Player

Posted by samzenpus on Thursday December 19, 2013 @02:07PM from the show-me-the-money dept.

sfcrazy writes "The newly formed company has opened the next chapter of its history by bagging $23 million financing from A16Z (Andreessen Horowitz). CyanogenMod was recently incorporated as a company after getting Benchmark Capital and Redpoint Ventures as partners and raising $7 million in funding."

93 of 133 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Cyanogenmod, by lukemartinez · 2013-12-19 14:09 · Score: 1, Interesting

CyanogenMod, now with advertising.
1. Re:Cyanogenmod, by DavidClarkeHR · 2013-12-19 14:14 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  CyanogenMod, now with advertising.
  Not every giant, successful tech company that displaces competition will immediately start advertising.
  
  Take ... uh ...
  
  --
  - Nec Impar Pluribus, or so I'm told.
2. Re:Cyanogenmod, by cervesaebraciator · 2013-12-19 14:37 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  It's in all facets of life now. You can't even find a guy with good karma on an online forum who won't leverage it for some cash on the side.
  --
  This message brought to you by the friendly people at Starbucks (TM). Starbucks (TM): Because Caffeine's the Only Addictive Psychoactive Stimulant You're Allowed at Work.
3. Re:Cyanogenmod, by Jane+Q.+Public · 2013-12-19 14:37 · Score: 2
  
  "Not every giant, successful tech company that displaces competition will immediately start advertising."
  I doubt they'll go the Google route, because their very reason for existence -- and why people use it at all -- is to bypass all that Google garbage.
  
  If they just copy Google's business model, why would anybody want CyanogenMod?
4. Re:Cyanogenmod, by SpectreBlofeld · 2013-12-19 14:39 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  They don't necessarily have to make their revenue all from ads.
  They can provide a polished, stable version of Android that is in many ways better than the original and provide support to the phone manufacturers (perhaps more cheaply than Google?), directly getting a cut from handset sales.
  They could start and manage their own app store and take a cut if app purchases.
  By working directly with manufacturers, they can spend less time hacking/reverse engineering stuff in order to get it to work with the hardware and instead focus on making their flavor of Android better and therefore desirable on handsets. Cyanogenmod has always been about being cutting-edge - pioneering many features long before AOSP. And not just 'fun' features but really important stuff like fine-detailed app permissions management (which has been WAY overdue). If they can now have a say in hardware design, I say, hell yes, bring it on. I hope to see cutting-edge badass smartphones with easy root access, high customize-ability/theming, and bleeding edge features.
  Lately I've been keeping an eye on the Sailfish project, but this news has refreshed my interest in the future of Android in general. Let's not be too cynical and assume it's all going to be about advertising. And even if there are ads, does anyone really think the ads could be any worse or more intrusive than the current state of Android in general?
  Maybe Canonical has spoiled everyone's attitudes toward the idea of monetizing open source. There's certainly a comparison to be made here. I'm not well-versed enough in the behind-the-scenes stuff to compare, but I wonder what the degree of impact Cyanogen has had on the Android world is, compared to Ubuntu's contribution to Linux, and what lessons we can take from the latter and apply to the former?
5. Re:Cyanogenmod, by ganjadude · 2013-12-19 14:48 · Score: 1
  
  I see what you did there
  
  --
  have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
6. Re:Cyanogenmod, by bhcompy · 2013-12-19 14:56 · Score: 1
  
  Because now they're a name, and that's all that matters. Google "Do not be evil". Apple "You'll see why 1984 won't be like "1984"". etc
7. Re:Cyanogenmod, by Jane+Q.+Public · 2013-12-19 15:16 · Score: 2
  
  Meh. I think it takes more than a name.
  
  CyanogenMod is not Google. They're still young, and they built their whole company based on the idea that they're not like Google. It would be pretty unrealistic to just throw that all away, then expect to get anywhere.
8. Re:Cyanogenmod, by cervesaebraciator · 2013-12-19 15:30 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  Wait, you can leverage karma for cash?
  Sure. You've just gotta come out of the shadows, get a UID, and join the club. You'll have all the details once you reach Level Five Laser Lotus. You didn't think the karma system was just a mutual admiration club, did you?
  --
  This message brought to you by the friendly people at the McDonald's (c). McDonald's (c): Keeping Life Too Short to Fix Food You'll Enjoy.
9. Re:Cyanogenmod, by lister+king+of+smeg · 2013-12-19 16:53 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  They don't necessarily have to make their revenue all from ads.
  They can provide a polished, stable version of Android that is in many ways better than the original and provide support to the phone manufacturers (perhaps more cheaply than Google?), directly getting a cut from handset sales.
  They could start and manage their own app store and take a cut if app purchases.
  By working directly with manufacturers, they can spend less time hacking/reverse engineering stuff in order to get it to work with the hardware and instead focus on making their flavor of Android better and therefore desirable on handsets. Cyanogenmod has always been about being cutting-edge - pioneering many features long before AOSP. And not just 'fun' features but really important stuff like fine-detailed app permissions management (which has been WAY overdue). If they can now have a say in hardware design, I say, hell yes, bring it on. I hope to see cutting-edge badass smartphones with easy root access, high customize-ability/theming, and bleeding edge features.
  Lately I've been keeping an eye on the Sailfish project, but this news has refreshed my interest in the future of Android in general. Let's not be too cynical and assume it's all going to be about advertising. And even if there are ads, does anyone really think the ads could be any worse or more intrusive than the current state of Android in general?
  Maybe Canonical has spoiled everyone's attitudes toward the idea of monetizing open source. There's certainly a comparison to be made here. I'm not well-versed enough in the behind-the-scenes stuff to compare, but I wonder what the degree of impact Cyanogen has had on the Android world is, compared to Ubuntu's contribution to Linux, and what lessons we can take from the latter and apply to the former?
  BLAH blah blah.
  They're just hoping to be bought by google, later, for much MORE money.
  how exactly do you buy a community developed distro?
  
  --
  ---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
10. Re:Cyanogenmod, by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-19 16:53 · Score: 1
  
  Of course you saw what he did there! You ALWAYS have adverts in your sig!
11. Re: Cyanogenmod, by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-19 17:02 · Score: 1
  
  *Google* their whole company based on the idea that they're not like Google.
12. Re:Cyanogenmod, by AmiMoJo · 2013-12-19 17:13 · Score: 2
  
  Red Hat? They seem to make their money on support. I can see manufacturers paying Cyanogen to support their devices and keep them up to date.
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
13. Re:Cyanogenmod, by phantomfive · 2013-12-19 17:34 · Score: 1
  
  The amazing thing would be if Cyanogen managed to wrest control of Android away from Google. Suddenly there is a fork, and they are running the AOSP2.
  
  --
  "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
14. Re:Cyanogenmod, by grcumb · 2013-12-19 17:43 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  They don't necessarily have to make their revenue all from ads.
  They can provide a polished, stable version of Android that is in many ways better than the original and provide support to the phone manufacturers (perhaps more cheaply than Google?), directly getting a cut from handset sales.
  That seems to be the obvious value in this company. Phone makers have demonstrated time and again how badly they manage their own Android distros, and how much they see them as a cost-centre rather than an opportunity to better position themselves in the market.
  Given the state of current MBAThink, why wouldn't they want to outsource the heavy lifting of distro management to a company that not only does it well, but does it better than their competitors? If CM play their cards right, they could start a bidding war, or at very least, make sure that their's is a seller's market.
  I especially like this idea because it upsets the playing field a little. Cyanogenmod can be ported at low cost to a number of generic platforms, allowing cheap(er) phone makers to gussy up their product without much effort. So to the consumer, there won't be much to choose between an SGS4 and a KungPaoDuk Delightra XXS Happy Screen. (Visually, at least.)
  
  --
  Crumb's Corollary: Never bring a knife to a bun fight.
15. Re:Cyanogenmod, by bill_mcgonigle · 2013-12-19 18:01 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  They can provide a polished, stable version of Android that is in many ways better than the original and provide support to the phone manufacturers (perhaps more cheaply than Google?), directly getting a cut from handset sales.
  I've got an old Droid 3 that I like the hardware on but never did much like the software, which is now obsolete. One dev got 4.2 working except for the camera - if CM got the camera driver from Moto ($) and put out a KitKat build, I'd gladly pay $30-50 for that.
  That's not a terrible business model. I'd also pay that kind of money yearly for an audited and updated build on any phone I carry.
  
  --
  My God, it's Full of Source!
  OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
16. Re:Cyanogenmod, by jonwil · 2013-12-19 19:46 · Score: 1
  
  The downside for Cyanogenmod is that there are now features they cant support in the mod without their new partners getting upset. And instances where they will have to include features in some part of the OS where they then cant publish the code for it or where they have to restrict it to specific hardware.
17. Re:Cyanogenmod, by Luckyo · 2013-12-19 21:13 · Score: 1
  
  I'd be betting on a big manufacturer buying them instead, such as Samsung, to start their own phone line loosely based on android.
18. Re:Cyanogenmod, by Desler · 2013-12-19 23:59 · Score: 1
  
  I can see manufacturers paying Cyanogen to support their devices and keep them up to date.
  That's a good joke. Keeping a phone up to date means being unable to upsell the newest model with the newest OS.
19. Re:Cyanogenmod, by wbr1 · 2013-12-20 00:09 · Score: 1
  
  Most of the free apps I use contain adds. I have devices running stock carrier versions and various ROMs including cyanogenmod. One of the absolute worst is the weather channel app.
  Oftentimes there are deceiving ads for pure shitware in that app. Ads that look like legitimate errors with messages such as "Critical Android Error" "Click to repair". This is a mainstream app, by a supposedly reputable company, and it is feeding me malware ads. Why there is not some sort of vetting service for ads across all devices I do not know. So many companies seem too willing to accept a few pennies for fucking their customers. I do not mind some unobtrusive and real ads, but feed me malware whose sole purpose is to fuck naive users over and I will hate you for life.
  I deal daily with people who simply do not know how they got 5 toolbars and 3 browser hijackers installed on their devices. Each one slowly reducing their security, injecting ads into search results, until finally they click on something really bad like a cryptolocker or FBI virus installer.
  I do not know if the real shame is that there are companies that willingly feed this market, and accept its money, or that our government would rather spend billions tracking phone calls then preventing its citizens from getting assraped by con artists.
  
  --
  Silence is a state of mime.
20. Re:Cyanogenmod, by Bing+Tsher+E · 2013-12-20 00:35 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  All food doesn't need to taste 'good.' All walls don't need to be frescoes painted by commissioned artists. Rinse. Repeat.
21. Re:Cyanogenmod, by S.O.B. · 2013-12-20 01:14 · Score: 1
  
  Typical MBA-speak.
  If I'm forced to buy a new device because a manufacturer can't/won't keep the OS up to date what makes you think I won't purchase from a better manufacturer next time.
  You don't cultivate brand loyalty by screwing over your customers. At least not in the Android world where there's competition.
  
  --
  Some of what I say is fact, some is conjecture, the rest I'm just blowing out my ass...you guess.
22. Re:Cyanogenmod, by Beyond_GoodandEvil · 2013-12-20 01:17 · Score: 1
  
  I heartily agree, I have a Galaxy Nexus that became almost useless with my car's handsfree when Google swapped the Bluez bluetooth stack for Broadcom's in 4.2, 4.3 didn't fix the problems and there's still a thread in code.google for the other Nexus phones using KitKat. CM10.1 and 10.2 work perfectly with my car making my phone useful again. I would also pay 30-50 bucks for that(not to mention there's an effort to port 4.4 to the GNex something Google refuses to do[Thanks, Texas Instruments]).
  
  --
  I laughed at the weak who considered themselves good because they lacked claws.
23. Re:Cyanogenmod, by Desler · 2013-12-20 01:31 · Score: 1
  
  Typical MBA-speak.
  Duh? That was sort of my entire point...
  
  If I'm forced to buy a new device because a manufacturer can't/won't keep the OS up to date what makes you think I won't purchase from a better manufacturer next time.
  Because all of the major Android manufacturers are pretty much the same in this respect?
  
  You don't cultivate brand loyalty by screwing over your customers. At least not in the Android world where there's competition.
  So outside of a few niche brands, which of the major Android manufacturers don't have the same issues of abandoning phone updates?
24. Re:Cyanogenmod, by BitZtream · 2013-12-20 03:26 · Score: 1
  
  Hahahah. You think people will pay for android? Bwahahahaha.
  The people using android (both device makers and users) are too cheap to pay for a non-shitty ad ladened OS, thats why they use Android in the first place.
  You're an idiot if you think anyone is going to bye Cyanogen, device maker or individual. You might as well try to sell a million dollar house to the homeless man laying on the street, you'll have better luck.
  You Android fanboys live in a delusion about why Android is so prolific. Let me give you a hint, your reasons, aren't it. Its all about the cost, specifically, lack of.
  
  --
  Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
25. Re:Cyanogenmod, by BitZtream · 2013-12-20 03:28 · Score: 1
  
  ... Same way all of these sorts of open projects have been bought in the past? Buy it from the project leaders. Whats so difficult to understand? Its no different than Oracle buying MySQL. Except Google isn't stupid enough to buy something that they can have for free and can't make disappear even if they do buy it.
  
  --
  Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
26. Re:Cyanogenmod, by gmuslera · 2013-12-20 03:47 · Score: 1
  
  For that you have Ubuntu Touch, built on top of base cyanogenmod. In fact, there are a lot of different linux mobile OSs that could be built over base cyanogenmod/android, Sailfish, or Firefox OS seem to be between those.
27. Re:Cyanogenmod, by the_B0fh · 2013-12-20 03:51 · Score: 1
  
  And not just 'fun' features but really important stuff like fine-detailed app permissions management (which has been WAY overdue).
  No way! According to mlw4428 (1029576) at http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=4553509&cid=45716831 it is very very very hard to use fine detailed, post install, app permissions management. At least for Android developers...
  [I still don't fucking understand why so many Android developers keep saying it's hard, waah, waaah, when iOS developers have no issues with it]
28. Re:Cyanogenmod, by ottothecow · 2013-12-20 04:24 · Score: 1
  
  Not even loosely based on android...more along the lines of still android, but way better than TouchWiz.
  
  --
  Bottles.
29. Re:Cyanogenmod, by ottothecow · 2013-12-20 04:31 · Score: 1
  
  Unfortunately, that is the state of many of those ad providers....they are scummy.
  I am a member of a forum that keeps struggling with this stuff. On the desktop version, you keep getting these ads that make noise or pop out from the space they are supposed to stay in. On the mobile version, you've got ads that are supposed to be constrained to the dedicated ad space, but instead sometimes decide that they should *always* float on the bottom of the screen (or worse, decide they should actually take up half of the screen instead of the dedicated space).
  When users report these with enough info (screenshot, snippet of the source, etc), they can track them down and slap the advertiser on the wrist for letting them through. But sure enough they crop up again (for a different company/product) a week later...just as bad as the spammers. You can't really expect the ad companies to verify every bit of code and ad that goes out...these things are sometimes only worth pennies, so they have to trust that their clients to submit clean ads and wait for people to report bad actors.
  
  --
  Bottles.
30. Re:Cyanogenmod, by geminidomino · 2013-12-20 04:59 · Score: 1
  
  What niche brands might those be? I'm looking for a new phone to replace failing hardware (the touchscreen on my Evo 4G has started acting wonky with the on-screen keyboard)
31. Re:Cyanogenmod, by S.O.B. · 2013-12-20 12:27 · Score: 1
  
  Typical MBA-speak.
  Duh? That was sort of my entire point...
  That may have been what you meant in your head but your post could have been taken either way. Sorry I'm not psychic.
  
  If I'm forced to buy a new device because a manufacturer can't/won't keep the OS up to date what makes you think I won't purchase from a better manufacturer next time.
  Because all of the major Android manufacturers are pretty much the same in this respect?
  
  You don't cultivate brand loyalty by screwing over your customers. At least not in the Android world where there's competition.
  So outside of a few niche brands, which of the major Android manufacturers don't have the same issues of abandoning phone updates?
  The market is already evolving. Consumers are already becoming aware of issues such as vendor lock in and lack of OS upgrades. The market may lean more towards the "fewer updates" end of the scale today but I don't think it will stay that way for long. A guaranteed x years of upgrades would be a great way for a smaller player to differentiate themselves from the rest of the pack and contracting someone like Cyanogen Mod to maintain it would be a good way to accomplish that.
  
  --
  Some of what I say is fact, some is conjecture, the rest I'm just blowing out my ass...you guess.
32. Re:Cyanogenmod, by lister+king+of+smeg · 2013-12-20 15:58 · Score: 1
  
  how exactly do you buy a community developed distro?
  You buy the IP, it's not rocket surgery.
  if it is open source won't the community just fork it again like with libreoffice and openoffice.org
  
  --
  ---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
33. Re:Cyanogenmod, by messymerry · 2013-12-21 06:29 · Score: 1
  
  So they find some way to Scroogle it... Where there's a will, there's a way. Google has a lot of customers in the developer world, but I'm guessing they don't have that many friends.
  
  --
  Dear Microlimp: I give you 2 valid product keys for win7 and you reject both of them. Piss off you wankers!!!
What about contributers? by CryptoJones · 2013-12-19 14:18 · Score: 4, Interesting

What do people that have contributed to the code base get? Who is getting money for this? I don't understand how you can go from an opensource project to a for-profit project.

--
"Chance favors the prepared mind." ~Me
1. Re:What about contributers? by jrumney · 2013-12-19 14:38 · Score: 1
  
  They get a full time job contributing to the code base. That's usually how open source going to a "for-profit" (which is usually non-profit - maybe "funded" is a better word) model works.
2. Re:What about contributers? by exomondo · 2013-12-19 14:41 · Score: 1
  
  What do people that have contributed to the code base get? Who is getting money for this? I don't understand how you can go from an opensource project to a for-profit project.
  Why not? Open source has nothing to do with software cost and they can't just create a closed source derivative. That said I'm not sure what their monetization plan is, but maybe that was your point.
3. Re:What about contributers? by gl4ss · 2013-12-19 14:55 · Score: 1
  
  anyone who manages to get someone else to pay him is the one making money for it.
  if they contributed under the rules, they might not get anything. that's the rules they contributed under. of course they can make a demand to get money or else they'll stop contributing. if they're a good enough contributor they'll get money then.
  now.. open-source and for-profit are not mutually exclusive at all(heck, see linux kernel for a good example).
  basically you can still stay open source while being "for profit". of course now they are not yet making actually profit as far as I know, so it's more like "how can one find someone to pay him to work on an open source project?" and this model is one answer among many.
  
  --
  world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
4. Re:What about contributers? by exomondo · 2013-12-19 14:56 · Score: 2
  
  hrm...actually it seems that's perhaps what they are planning to do, by re-licensing GPL components. Interesting Google+ post from the developer of Focal about Cyanogen Inc.
5. Re:What about contributers? by turbidostato · 2013-12-19 15:04 · Score: 2
  
  "What do people that have contributed to the code base get?"
  Whatever they negotiated whenever they engaged their contracts.
6. Re:What about contributers? by thisisauniqueid · 2013-12-19 15:22 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  What do people that have contributed to the code base get? Who is getting money for this? I don't understand how you can go from an opensource project to a for-profit project.
  They get nada. I implemented one of the features that caused CM to explode in popularity very early on, and cyanogen did very well out of donations from it, but I never saw a cent of it. I gently raised the issue one day, and he made it pretty clear that he had no intention of divvying up the wealth. Granted, he has put a heckofalot more time total into hacking on CM than I have, but actually, I would have spent a lot more time hacking on it if it weren't for that experience. That was the last code I wrote for CM.
7. Re:What about contributers? by citizenr · 2013-12-19 15:24 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  they get loved tenderly in the ass
  https://plus.google.com/+GuillaumeLesniak/posts/L8FJkrcahPs
  
  --
  Who logs in to gdm? Not I, said the duck.
8. Re:What about contributers? by thisisauniqueid · 2013-12-19 15:24 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  PS granted, Steve is a very good hacker and a generally all-around good guy, the only thing I'm pointing out is that, at least at that point, he wasn't about the Utopian ideal of sharing around the wealth with the commoners that work in the fields. But maybe not being a communist is a good thing, or he may not have landed the most recent round of funding.
9. Re:What about contributers? by JanneM · 2013-12-19 15:57 · Score: 1
  
  What do people that have contributed to the code base get? Who is getting money for this? I don't understand how you can go from an opensource project to a for-profit project.
  With open source you let people use your code, and they let others - including you - use their code in turn. That's the payment, if you will. If you contributed to CM, then the availability of the rest of the CM codebase under a compatible license is what you get.
  As for profits - nothing stops you from taking the rest of the CM code base and trying to make it a business, in the same way the CM devels are doing now. And if you do, you won't have to pay the CM developers (or the kernel devels, or user-space tool developers and so on) any more than they have to pay you.
  
  --
  Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
10. Re:What about contributers? by thegarbz · 2013-12-19 17:19 · Score: 1
  
  What do people that have contributed to the code base get? Who is getting money for this? I don't understand how you can go from an opensource project to a for-profit project.
  Open-Source and For-Profit are not mutually exclusive. See every commercial Linux project currently on the market. Plenty have contributors, and plenty have managers who make money from it.
  If you're contributing to open-source with the expectation of getting paid then you're in for a rude surprise.
11. Re:What about contributers? by wolrahnaes · 2013-12-19 18:01 · Score: 1
  
  hrm...actually it seems that's perhaps what they are planning to do, by re-licensing GPL components. Interesting Google+ post from the developer of Focal about Cyanogen Inc.
  And to do so they need to get the permission of the contributors, because copyright still applies and that's how copyleft licenses work. Thus the answer to "what about the contributors?" is "whatever the contributors agreed to."
  If they contributed code under an open source license that allows relicensing like BSD, that was their choice and it means that either they implicitly approved from day one or didn't bother to understand the license they chose and screwed themselves.
  
  --
  I used to get high on life, but I developed a tolerance. Now I need something stronger.
12. Re:What about contributers? by drinkypoo · 2013-12-19 20:32 · Score: 1
  
  What do people that have contributed to the code base get? Who is getting money for this? I don't understand how you can go from an opensource project to a for-profit project.
  You, too, can download the sources and fork CM. Have at!
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
13. Re:What about contributers? by Eunuchswear · 2013-12-19 21:13 · Score: 1
  
  CDDB
  Been there, seen that.
  
  --
  Watch this Heartland Institute video
14. Re:What about contributers? by Pigeon451 · 2013-12-20 00:43 · Score: 1
  
  I thought people generally contributed to open source to help everyone out and get a better product, not to share potential revenue. Cyanogenmod is open source and must remain so. Now that the maintainers have raised funding to really get Cyanogenmod into the mainstream, you're backing off? Sounds a bit backwards to me. If you really want some cash, maybe see if you can get hired by them...
15. Re:What about contributers? by JanneM · 2013-12-20 01:27 · Score: 1
  
  You, too, can download the sources and fork CM. Have at!
  Why? I'm not the one who has a problem with people making money off of it. And I certainly wouldn't want to take on the enormous workload that a business takes. I have a day job, and don't need a second one.
  
  --
  Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
16. Re:What about contributers? by Andy+Dodd · 2013-12-20 02:52 · Score: 1
  
  They potentially get shafted - https://plus.google.com/+GuillaumeLesniak/posts/L8FJkrcahPs
  One of the new company's first actions as a corporate entity was to try and use the CyanogenMod Contributor License Agreement to relicense a major GPLv3 contribution (a total rewrite of the camera app) AFTER work was completed (even though work was started well after they had formed as a company).
  So they are promising that "everything you see now will remain open source" - but actions speak louder than words, and one of their first actions was to seek rights to create a closed-source version of the camera app.
  Fortunately, their CLA didn't give them the power they thought it did. They claim the whole thing was just a "misunderstanding" - but if they were unaware that Guillaume wanted to keep the GPL, why were they bringing up the CLA, a document which serves solely to mediate licensing *disputes*?
  
  --
  retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
17. Re:What about contributers? by Andy+Dodd · 2013-12-20 02:55 · Score: 1
  
  In this specific case - the CM team tried to use the project's Contributor Licensing Agreement (CLA) as an intimidation tactic. (Effectively, saying it allowed them to relicense Focal when, in reality, it didn't.)
  In the end, Focal was never relicensed BECAUSE Guillaume chose a license that protected him - BUT there is the fact that they tried to convince him that their CLA would allow them to relicense his code whether he liked it or not.
  (Note: Some CLAs, such as Canonical's Harmony CLA, explicitly grant the recipient of a contribution rights to do this. The AOSP CLA, which CM's is a nearly identical copy of, does NOT grant such rights.)
  
  --
  retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
18. Re:What about contributers? by thisisauniqueid · 2013-12-20 06:07 · Score: 1
  
  It was the attitude, not the money.
19. Re:What about contributers? by spectrumlogic · 2013-12-21 09:21 · Score: 1
  
  Clearly this is one of the most intriguing aspects of the open source model...does anyone know of an accepted compensation schema that attempts to equitably distribute earnings to coding participants? ... or even have any ideas about such a solution? Resolving this conundrum could change OS appeal and dynamic...possibly turning "OS coder" into a viable career path would increase rates of innovation and foster community cooperation...I'm just saying...
Oh, great. by geminidomino · 2013-12-19 14:20 · Score: 5, Insightful

So either CM goes to shit, full of advertising and scumware, like pretty much every other commercial OS, or they don't, founder, and fade away.
Either way, it was nice while it lasted, I suppose.
1. Re:Oh, great. by jbeaupre · 2013-12-19 15:13 · Score: 1
  
  I'm hoping they become a third party software and support house for phone manufacturers. Obviously the manufactures don't want to be bothered keeping software updated, but might be willing to offload the work to CM. CM then gets a lump sum to provide OS and updates for x number of years and the manufacturers get to look like heroes to their customers.
  Alternately, they become the equivalent to after-market car parts source. For a low cost, you get the replacement parts/software you need soup up your stock car/hardware.
  hoping. I said hoping.
  
  --
  The world is made by those who show up for the job.
2. Re:Oh, great. by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-19 15:47 · Score: 1
  
  This happened many months ago when the lead developer sold out, updates became slow, then stopped supporting major but older devices. This has been coming for a while, anyone could see it. Money is as money does. Affluenza indeed.
  It's so stupid. This is exactly what I said would happen when jackass sold out yet everyone said I was crazy... bunch of morons
3. Re:Oh, great. by martin-boundary · 2013-12-19 23:00 · Score: 1
  
  Unlikely, as that would mean sharing hardware specs and drivers, which isn't something hardware companies like to do, ever.
4. Re:Oh, great. by Pigeon451 · 2013-12-20 00:35 · Score: 1
  
  Google has full control over android. ALL purchases and a lot of activity is "logged" by Google. You don't think a more transparent OS would be beneficial to the community? The OS would have to remain open source also. Look at what canonical has done for Linux in the past 10 years...
5. Re:Oh, great. by IamTheRealMike · 2013-12-20 02:33 · Score: 1
  
  Er, my Nexus 5 doesn't have any advertising or "scumware" on it out of the box, as far as I can tell. What are you talking about?
Enterprise edition? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-19 14:26 · Score: 1

I love their mods, but the one thing that held me back years ago was the lack of umm... credibility. But for my higher-ups, it's an issue of liability/ accountability/ warranty.
But these days, I'd just get a Nexus - go straight to the Android source.
Mediatek - the new dominating chipset... by GrpA · 2013-12-19 14:29 · Score: 1

This is why a lot of us are buying the Faea F2S already - it's going native Cyanogenmod and fully open-source with factory assistance, now that Cyanogenmod and Faea have teamed up and released the F2S source code.
Given that something like the F2S only costs around $250 and has pretty much every feature that the current bleeding-edge phones have, it's going to be interesting to see how this affects the other phones on the market.
Mind you, emphasis on the bleeding there. It really is at the edge of technological development - and isn't the sort of phone you buy if you don't enjoy tinkering, frequent reboots and weekly flashing the firmware :)
GrpA

--
Enjoy science fiction? "Turing Evolved" - AI, Mecha, Androids and rail-gun battles. What more could you want?
1. Re:Mediatek - the new dominating chipset... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-19 14:41 · Score: 1
  
  You had me. I looked at the specs and then............... blah.
  Basically quadband GSM. Ok I can place a call most everywhere for the next couple of years (if I'm lucky). Networks are dismantling 2G GSM in all but the most remote of areas, where it's long reach is a good tradeoff for its crap spectral efficiency...
  But the. 3G GSM (UMTS/WCDMA). 1 Band listed, 2100. Today, that's not even good enough for europe, nevermind the US where it means you have a 2G GSM phone that is going to stop working with TMO and ATT start to tear down 2G GSM.
  And in Europe (and asia, and everywhere else that supports 2100 - which isn't actually everywhere), you'll see that 2100 limits your options since some carriers don't even operate on that band.
  Basically, anything less than pentaband WCDMA is crap in this day and age.
2. Re:Mediatek - the new dominating chipset... by GrpA · 2013-12-19 16:07 · Score: 1
  
  LoL! I did say bleeding edge with emphasis on the bleeding. And the older models supported multi-band 3G as well. This is the result of moving to a modem chipset for that model that only supports 2100 and it's generally considered a poor move. ( Same circuit board as the cheaper F2 model but a different modem chip ). It also has problems in 3G, but for those who can use it, we're hopeful that moving to Cyanogenmod will get the problems out of it. In the mean time, check out their forum if you want details of the problems their users are getting.
  But overall, it's still a pretty positive move and will be the first Mediatek 6589T chipset with native Cyanogenmod. Only a fool would rush in at the moment, but there's no shortage of us fools on their support forum. :)
  GrpA
  
  --
  Enjoy science fiction? "Turing Evolved" - AI, Mecha, Androids and rail-gun battles. What more could you want?
3. Re:Mediatek - the new dominating chipset... by bill_mcgonigle · 2013-12-19 18:06 · Score: 1
  
  You had me. I looked at the specs and then............... blah.
  Yeah, I'd love to support the underdog manufacturer, but I live in the 50% of the country (geo. not pop.) where only Verizon has reasonable coverage.
  I know, Qualcomm is the evil, but being able to make calls is worth something.
  
  --
  My God, it's Full of Source!
  OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
4. Re:Mediatek - the new dominating chipset... by Eunuchswear · 2013-12-20 12:34 · Score: 1
  
  Some idiot thinks my comment is a troll.
  No, you moron, it's serious.
  The phone I've been using since 2009 does its software updates by "apt-get update/apt-get upgrade". There is no primitive idiocy of "roms" or "flashing".
  
  --
  Watch this Heartland Institute video
$23 Million makes you a major player? by JohnStock · 2013-12-19 14:32 · Score: 1

In this day and age isn't that a drop in the ocean, especially when some competitors have up to 3 order of magnitude more cash?
$23M USD is all it takes by turkeydance · 2013-12-19 14:37 · Score: 1

to be a MAJOR player? Cano got $240M and the Yankees didn't want him.
Re:I quit trusting Cyanogenmod 9-26-13 by SpectreBlofeld · 2013-12-19 15:02 · Score: 4, Informative

If I'm reading this correctly - you stopped trusting Cyanogenmod because you apparently accidentally tried to use your Gmail credentials to log at the Cyanogenmod account login prompt? That's like accidentally putting in your Gmail login info at the Facebook login screen. Why would that make you trust CM less?
For anyone who's interested, here's a rundown on the Cyanogenmod account stuff:
http://www.cyanogenmod.org/blog/cyanogenmod-account
Re:I quit trusting Cyanogenmod 9-26-13 by rueger · 2013-12-19 15:09 · Score: 2

If I'm reading this correctly

You're doing better than me - I read that three times and still have no clue what he's saying. And yes, I've installed CM a few times on various phones.

--
Three Squirrels
Re:I quit trusting Cyanogenmod 9-26-13 by SpectreBlofeld · 2013-12-19 15:16 · Score: 1

Yeah, that's pretty much just my best guess...
Will it Update? by rueger · 2013-12-19 15:18 · Score: 1

Of late I've been thinking that Android is probably the biggest security nightmare around.

Not because there's anything intrinsicly wrong with Android itself, but because (my guess) at least 50% of all Android phones will never see an update of any sort.

Regardless of how secure your device may have been out of the box, the first time that there's a security weakness you have to trust that a) Google will fix it in Android or b) The manufacturer will fix it in their modified version of Android, or c) The wireless carrier will fix it in their even more modified version of the manufacturer's modified version of Android.

Right now I'm running with a six month old Samsung phone. Running ICS! I am certain it will never get JB, much less KitKat, and I'm certain that it will never see any kind of security fixes. I think this is true for at least half of all phones out there today.

These are small computers used for social networking, banking, and all manner of highly important tasks. Tasks that involve highly personal information. How long will it be before we see a massive disaster when someone figures out how to game all of the ICS and older Android phones? Or the hundreds ir thousands of oddball Chinese variants over there?

--
Three Squirrels
1. Re:Will it Update? by SpectreBlofeld · 2013-12-19 15:51 · Score: 2
  
  Heh. Gotta ask... have you looked into putting CM on it? Because I'd wager that 80% of people that use Cyanogen are those who can't wait for official updates.
2. Re:Will it Update? by TClevenger · 2013-12-19 17:52 · Score: 1
  
  The iPhone 3GS got its last update six months after they discontinued selling the phone. I don't see a lot of support from any smartphone manufacturers.
3. Re:Will it Update? by rueger · 2013-12-19 18:08 · Score: 1
  
  Problem is that probably 60% of phones don't have a CM version available.
  
  --
  Three Squirrels
4. Re:Will it Update? by synapse7 · 2013-12-20 01:17 · Score: 1
  
  There are nightly updates, http://changelog.bbqdroid.org/
  Also, reading your post was painful.
Re:I quit trusting Cyanogenmod 9-26-13 by Trax3001BBS · 2013-12-19 15:25 · Score: 1

If I'm reading this correctly
You're doing better than me - I read that three times and still have no clue what he's saying. And yes, I've installed CM a few times on various phones.
My bad, my grammar gets heck, yet try hard to make it presentable, then leave out the point, I guess figuring it's a given.
I block tracking, I've been at it so long it's second nature, the link given as a replay states "* We have no interest in selling your data", well I keep that to myself.
or try to.
Are the Android OEMs banned from shipping CM? by mystikkman · 2013-12-19 15:44 · Score: 2, Interesting

I remember when Google threatened Acer with losing the Play Store and all Google app to stop Aliyun, claiming that the secret rules of the "Open" Handset Alliance prevented Acer from shipping Android forks.
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013/10/googles-iron-grip-on-android-controlling-open-source-by-any-means-necessary/3
Anyone know if the same rules prohibit all the major OEMs from shipping CM or Jolla(which has Android app support via a third party Dalvik implementation) phones?
The major OEMs include Acer, Asus, Dell, Foxconn, Fujitsu, HTC, Huawei, Kyocera, Lenovo, LG, Motorola, NEC, Samsung, Sharp, Sony, Toshiba, and ZTE.
1. Re:Are the Android OEMs banned from shipping CM? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-19 18:48 · Score: 1
  
  So you couldn't spare the 2 minutes to do a Google search? You just decided to talk out of your ass instead? When you join the OHA you agree not to participate in creating an incompatible version of Android. It kind of contradicts what the OHA stands for so it was stupid of Acer to even attempt to do so. CM is fully Android CTS compliant otherwise they would never be granted the ability to install Google Apps and Services.
2. Re: Are the Android OEMs banned from shipping CM? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-19 20:03 · Score: 1
  
  They do not have access to the google APIs and stuff. They pretty much have to reimplement many things that google makes available to compliant companies. Location services is one that I remember specifically. There was a good article a few weeks ago regarding how everytime google put something on the play store it meant they were close sourcing that app and abondaning the AOSP counterpart.
3. Re:Are the Android OEMs banned from shipping CM? by mystikkman · 2013-12-20 01:44 · Score: 1
  
  They don't have the ability to install Gapps and Services. People download them from other sites that are committing copyright infringement and which can be taken down by Google.
  http://phandroid.com/2009/09/25/cyanogen-gets-cd-from-google/
4. Re:Are the Android OEMs banned from shipping CM? by tepples · 2013-12-20 07:41 · Score: 1
  
  Preinstalled CM can; aftermarket CM can't.
A little scared but not much by WaffleMonster · 2013-12-19 18:42 · Score: 3, Interesting

Here is the deal as I see it yes I'm worried all of this money will erode the point of cynaogenmod (e.g. selling-out) yet when you look at it most of the value of cyanogen is bottled up in their amazing build platform which is open source and actively used by other competing mods. If cyanogen gets too far off the rails or is perceived as such it will be forked and that will be that.
Re:Sold down the river... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-12-19 18:51 · Score: 2, Interesting

Why do Microsoft shills think Android is bombarded with ads? I realize you congregate in a cesspool known as Windows, but you should really try and use the platform before displaying your ignorance. Speaking of cesspools, have you seen the windows phone store lately? It's really one of the most pathetic things I've ever seen.
Re:I quit trusting Cyanogenmod 9-26-13 by drinkypoo · 2013-12-19 20:34 · Score: 1

All I got out of it is that he was disturbed by CM asking him to use a CM account, with a big fat "Skip" on the screen so you don't have to. Then he says he didn't know you could do that at the time. I presume it's because he can't read, because Skip means skip.

--
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Re:Sold down the river... by Luckyo · 2013-12-19 21:14 · Score: 1

Because they are. One of the reasons for cyanogenmod's existence is to cut down on the "ad bombardment" through reduction of data collection and implementing privacy control and limited ad blocking.
Bad News by ThatsNotPudding · 2013-12-20 00:45 · Score: 2

Now that they've decided to become 'kept women' by investor money, forget about them being a continued source of freedom, rapidity, or actual innovation. Selling out to the 'man' means they will end up being just another awful corporatized Android skin chock-full of shovelware that can never be removed. Yay, greed.
What I hate... by emil · 2013-12-20 05:37 · Score: 1

...is that Cyanogenmod aggressively obsoletes older phones.
I am on Page Plus Cellular. If you look at their phones for sale, everything is Gingerbread. They also don't allow 4G devices on their network without substantial neutering of the firmware. And while they accept most Verizon 3G devices on their network, they strongly suggest that you leave the Verizon firmware intact.
So I run a DINC, which Cyanogenmod long ago put out to pasture, Gingerbread only. Evervolv took it to Android 4.1, and some guy took the Evervolv kernel and jacked it into 4.2.2.
So I run a very reliable phone with recent software on a cheap network with phenomenal coverage. But there is no hope that Cyanogenmod will ever be offered by my vendor (Page Plus) for sale on their network, because Cyanogenmod nukes legacy devices from their source tree.
This is a phenomenally bad business decision. I do not expect them to be successful, and I am not planning to invest.
1. Re:What I hate... by Andy+Dodd · 2013-12-20 07:31 · Score: 1
  
  While I'm unhappy with many aspects of CM - They have never forcefully EOLed a device that was technically capable of running newer versions of Android.
  Yes, prior to "inc" everything was volunteer based, and sometimes a volunteer would drop a device. Other devices (such as the original GalaxyS family) are going on forever.
  There are only two cases I know of where CM "aggressively" EOLed anything:
  1) The announcement that Snapdragon S1 series devices (such as the MSM7227 - NOT the 7227A) would be dropped. This was due to the fact that it was not possible for these devices to run 4.0 and later while still passing Google CTS. One of the rules for CM was "don't break apps" - Now, some CTS violations were just stupid (like anything related to root, or allowing apps to write to external SD) and CM used to let these slide. But if a device had a GPU that had no chance of rendering apps correctly on ICS and beyond - that would get EOLed.
  2) EOLing of Nvidia Tegra2 sometime around Android 4.2 or 4.3 - This was because gapps for 4.2 or 4.3 *required* NEON instructions, which Tegra2 lacks
  In your case - the problem lies with the fact that you have a shitty carrier that is an MVNO of one of the worst offenders in the business (Verizon) with respect to blocking alternate firmwares of any sort, not with CM. Seriously, if you want a decent Android device, your chances are slim to none on Verizon or any of their MVNOs.
  
  --
  retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
2. Re:What I hate... by bill_mcgonigle · 2013-12-21 09:09 · Score: 1
  
  That's a great point. I'd like to see an open source group get a grant to keep CM (or its successor if they close up) updated for old devices, so less affluent people can have good access to technology.
  KitKat should make that even easier, with better memory requirements.
  
  --
  My God, it's Full of Source!
  OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
Countries with no Google Checkout by tepples · 2013-12-20 07:45 · Score: 1

In a lot of countries, Android launched before Google Checkout. To reach users in those countries, developers had to price their apps at $0.00 and make up the balance with in-app advertisements.
So let me get this straight... by emil · 2013-12-20 07:53 · Score: 1

In April 2010, Engadget stated: "the DROID Incredible is the best Android device that you can purchase in America right now."
Verizon is the largest network in the US.
Cyanogenmod is avoiding Verizon's MVNOs because they are supposedly blocking the CM10.1 that I am currently running.
This business model is doomed. You play the hand you're dealt with the people you have.
Talkatone is bad for that by emil · 2013-12-20 09:08 · Score: 1

The first time that I used it, a (very!) convincing ad banner indicated that I had new voicemail.
It's hard to complain when I have unlimited free calls and texting, but I would really prefer more tasteful ads that were intelligently targetted.
There should be a button for all adware: PRESS IF YOU'D NEVER BUY THIS. That would save everybody a lot of grief.